The recent events surrounding County Mayor Weston Wamp’s war with the County Commission brings to mind the value of professionalism in our elected officials. The true professional will never venture off into character assassination on core issues.
Just facts and data will rule the day of the elected professional.
Our County Commission is comprised of business and community leaders that have decades of elected service. All but two commissioners have long-term experience on the school board or in small city local governments. The notion that the commission is new and novice is simply untrue. They are a group that understands their elected role.
The County Commission acts as a collective where a majority votes and controls the budget; and therefore, the commission determines the future direction. Hamilton County is a strong commission form of government; each county commissioner is a leader in their own right and represents an entire district. The commission form of county government is set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated, the most boring set of books ever created.
A county mayor presents budgets and proposals to the elected commission for their consideration and potential approval. The county mayor is an executive administrator who may only spend funds at the will of the collective commission by vote. The county mayor is essentially a non-voting fiduciary, or executive administrator who appropriates funds in accordance with County Commission approval, and ensures a continuation of services.
In my opinion, we got it pretty darn good with Hamilton County government. Historically, the County Commission has been financially conservative and kept property taxes relatively low for a metro area.
The current difference of opinion between the county mayor and the collective commissioners are centered on opposing views that stem from the employment contract of County Attorney Rheubin Taylor. The secondary issue raised is whether the County Commission shares 50 percent control over the hiring and firing of the county attorney and auditor positions. These are the core issues in dispute.
It is a natural order for the county mayor and County Commission to disagree on subject matter, and it is appropriate to have heated debates. A mayor and board should not be the same arm. It is the normal order to have civil differences of opinion and debate for hours if needed. That is how government by the people operates in a process of proposal, discussion, and debate. Unfortunately, the county mayor has deviated into a campaign of character assassination targeting the parties with opposing views. While debate on the core subject matter should occur in open plain sight, there are lines being crossed by Wamp 1 and 2.
The County Commission recently employed, on an interim basis, the highly respected attorney John Konvalinka. For citizens that opposed the Aetna Mountain TIF, attorney Konvalinka and his activist client are heroes. Instead of dealing with the employee contract issues at hand, Weston Wamp has engaged in character assassination of not only attorney Rheubin Taylor, but John Konvalinka.
Weston Wamp has referred to attorney Konvalinka as,
“he is the meanest SOB in Hamilton County”
“the commission hired a divorce attorney to represent them”
and much more.
What the hay is Wamp doing, and how does character assassination benefit county government? Also, what is wrong with a divorce attorney?
When Mayor Wamp speaks during commission meetings or to media, the mayor is leveraging the power of elected office entrusted to him by the voters. To use the power and color of elected office to damage others will have consequences, as the mayor is acting outside of the authority entrusted to him. This is the point where we the people get damaged financially. Elected professionalism does not behave in this manner. You never would have heard County Mayor Jim Coppinger engage in character assassination on disputed issues with the commission.
Elected professionalism calls for discussion on the merits of the disputed issues surrounding 1) the employment contract of attorney Rheubin Taylor, and 2) whether the county attorney and auditor are County Commission controlled at a 50 percent level. When the color of elected office is used to damage the public perception of the character of attorneys John Konvalinka and Rheubin Taylor, there are serious lines being crossed.
If it was not enough that the county mayor was using his power of elected office to damage attorneys Taylor and Konvalinka, the district attorney, Coty Wamp, chimed in to throw her own brand of personal attacks at attorney Taylor.
The District Attorney of Hamilton County, Coty Wamp, posted the following online verbatim,
“1) Rheubin Taylor is a terrible and unethical county attorney who has sucked the teat of government for far too long.”
Are we sure Coty Wamp attended law school?
This was online for about half a day. I found the district attorney’s choice of words interesting considering the fact she was raised on government checks for 16 years followed by multiple jobs funded by the “teat of government. We can laugh at her words and say she was spouting off, but the truth is Wamp’s words originated from the color of public office.
Elected words have consequences.
In just a short two months one week in office, the county mayor has been sued by a county employee, and now holds the record as the most vetoed county mayor in Hamilton County history. This is not civic courage; this is a lack of professionalism. I wonder what the Wamps' strategy of problem solving with personal attack solutions will look like in four years.
This is clearly a case where elected professionalism would benefit the county mayor and the district attorney, and end financial exposure for the taxpayers. Debate the core issues without devolving to character assassination. The Wamp detractors, comprised of 44.3 percent or 20,512 voters, are stuck with these elected officials. I believe most voters would prefer that our property taxes remain at the current rate.
Try elected professionalism; just stick to the issues of elected office rather than the politics of personal destruction.
April Eidson